Why is the PS3 a fail?

Bajaratt said:
For the slower members of the class:

No shit the PS3 can play more games now, Nintendo used a completely different media before the game cube, otherwise it would all be backwards compatible from the start. They have to emulate the older games, which takes some time to do a professional job of it and they don't own every company that made games for them, so they're releasing the games over time. The Wii has significantly more potential for backwards compatibility and it'll overtake the PS3 easily enough; for someone who keeps talking about how the PS3 will be the best in the future, you're pretty shortsighted.
Click to expand...

I don't know how many retro Nintendo games you're expecting, but I'll say that throughout Wii's lifetime, it's not going to get more than however many PS1 and PS2 titles are out there that you've never even heard of before.

Not to mention, earlier NES/SEGA/N64 games not published by NES can still wind up on the Playstation Network... and already have.
 
Guiller said:
Your logic is one sided. Without the motion sensor in the Wii, you can still play those games. For example Zelda, it comes for Wii and GC, what is the diference? Wii has a gimmicky motion sensing device.
Click to expand...
No, your logic is just flawed and skewed. If you played with the game cube controller, you'd be playing on the game cube. To play Zelda on the Wii, you need the Wiimote; that's also the only game that was released to both consoles, so it's an exception, not the rule. Zelda was also a little more immersive with the wiimote controls; not much because it was just a port, but it was still more immersive than just hitting a button.

If you were to take out the wiimote on any of the other games, the game play would be changed drastically. Removing the Wiimote's motion sensing would be akin to taking out the cell processor and blu-ray drive of the PS3; you'd completely change the console.
 
Bajaratt said:
No, your logic is just flawed and skewed. If you played with the game cube controller, you'd be playing on the game cube. To play Zelda on the Wii, you need the Wiimote; that's also the only game that was released to both consoles, so it's an exception, not the rule. Zelda was also a little more immersive with the wiimote controls; not much because it was just a port, but it was still more immersive than just hitting a button.

If you were to take out the wiimote on any of the other games, the game play would be changed drastically. Removing the Wiimote's motion sensing would be akin to taking out the cell processor and blu-ray drive of the PS3; you'd completely change the console.
Click to expand...

lmao, my point exacly, one sided logic.
 
Really Bajaratt, the BC angle sucks. Congrats, they're porting games for you, and you're buying them even though you already bought them when you were playing N64 and have them in your closet in a box. I can still play my old PS1 and PS2 games... just stick em in the damn disc drive. Unless Wii is going to offer an attachment that'll read old cartridges, it's not backwards compatible. It doesn't actually play your old games, it sells you a new version of them.
 
Firestreak said:
Oh yeah, technically speaking, if Mortal Kombat 2 wasn't a wake up call Baja, games that were made before Playstation can still end up on the PSN. Any game that wasn't developed by Nintendo can...

I mean fuck... I can play Final Fantasy 1-6 on my PS3 just off their PS1 ports. Goldeneye's going to the Xbox live arcade and not touching the Wii's VC.
Click to expand...

This makes me sad, lots :(

But really, the only reason this is, is because MS owns Rare 100%, and they refuse to let Nintendo have the right to produce any* game where Nintendo worked with Rare

*Not really sure how accurate this is, but it does affect the output of the VC games
 
Guiller said:
lmao, my point exacly, one sided logic.
Click to expand...
It's one-sided how? Try actually making a point instead of just spouting off a non-responsive post. So far all you've shown is that you have no idea what a gimmick is. If we were all going to use as crappy logic as you are, the PS3's cell processor and blu-ray are just a gimmick, hell home and xbox live are too! They're in no way important features of the console, just things that barely add anything of value.

You take away six-axis, PS3 is barely effected, you take away Wiimote and game play is changed 100%. Do I need to use smaller words?
 
Last edited:
Unless you've never owned a previous console, Backwards Compatibility isn't a valid reason to buy the next. For those that have, it's just a perk.

Seriously, I wouldn't buy a PS3 to play PS1/2 games. I'd buy it to play PS3 games. I wouldn't buy a Wii to play GameCubes games

I didn't buy my DS because it can play GBA games. I didn't buy my SP because it can play Gameboy/GBC games. Or the 360 to play regular Xbox games.
 
Last edited:
Bajaratt said:
No, your logic is just flawed and skewed. If you played with the game cube controller, you'd be playing on the game cube. To play Zelda on the Wii, you need the Wiimote; that's also the only game that was released to both consoles, so it's an exception, not the rule. Zelda was also a little more immersive with the wiimote controls; not much because it was just a port, but it was still more immersive than just hitting a button.

If you were to take out the wiimote on any of the other games, the game play would be changed drastically. Removing the Wiimote's motion sensing would be akin to taking out the cell processor and blu-ray drive of the PS3; you'd completely change the console.
Click to expand...

The Wii embraces motion-control as its only method of control, therefore all games are built around the motion sensor. For PS3 games... motion controls are an OPTION, so if you feel like steering by turning the six-axis controller left and right... you have that choice. However if you feel like laying back on the couch, relaxing and steering with your stick, that's your choice too.

Games that are built without that choice, like flOw for one example, are completely as dependent on motion as any Wii game.

Choice is good.
 
Bajaratt said:
It's one-sided how? Try actually making a point instead of just spouting off a non-responsive post. So far all you've shown is that you have no idea what a gimmick is.
Click to expand...

/comfort Bajaratt, arguing with you is like, having a circumcision at 33 years of age, completly useless and not even thinking of doing it, I already have my experience of Nintendo Famboys at work, not planing of having one with you.
 
Guiller said:
/comfort Bajaratt, arguing with you is like, having a circumcision at 33 years of age, completly useless and not even thinking of doing it, I already have my experience of Nintendo Famboys at work, not planing of having one with you.
Click to expand...
What a coincidence, I have more than enough experience arguing with idiots who can't even make relevant responses or answer questions. If you're not actually going to make an intelligent point, or even defend your unintelligent one, don't bother posting.

The Wii embraces motion-control as its only method of control, therefore all games are built around the motion sensor. For PS3 games... motion controls are an OPTION, so if you feel like steering by turning the six-axis controller left and right... you have that choice. However if you feel like laying back on the couch, relaxing and steering with your stick, that's your choice too.

Games that are built without that choice, like flOw for one example, are completely as dependent on motion as any Wii game.

Choice is good.
Click to expand...
The choice is offered because of how little use the six-axis would actually provide the games given that it's in a normal controller. It'd feel completely unnatural to swing the PS3 controller like a sword. It was a last-minute addition, so naturally they had to make it optional or it'd fuck up the games that were already in development. Aside from driving, what good is it? Honestly, what else is it being used for besides driving and one game(flow).
 
Skaw said:
Unless you've never owned a previous console, Backwards Compatibility isn't a valid reason to buy the next. For those that have, it's just a perk.

Seriously, I wouldn't buy a PS3 to play PS1/2 games. I'd buy it to play PS3 games. I wouldn't buy a Wii to play GameCubes games, or a 360 to play regular Xbox games.
Click to expand...

Well it's useful if you have a PS2, memory cards and controllers you can sell off. It's useful in terms of being able to subtract their physical space, their need for a/v inputs and the price you can sell them for off of your PS3's price. For example Gamespot will give you 100 bucks off your PS3... that makes the BC effectively cheapen the PS3 100 dollars.

On top of that you've got a new system that'll be supported for longer to play your old games...

The same can be said about the gamecube, that by buying a wii, you offset the price of the wii by the value of your gamecube, except that you won't get as much for it and you need to keep all the memory cards and controllers. On top of that... PS2 + PS1 > Gamecube...
 
Bajaratt said:
What a coincidence, I have more than enough experience arguing with idiots who can't even make relevant responses or answer questions. If you're not actually going to make an intelligent point, or even defend your unintelligent one, don't bother posting.
Click to expand...


Ok here is the deal, I will start making "intelligent points" once you start making them for yourself. Also, look who needs to start "trying" to insult ppl to get their opinions accross.
 
Firestreak said:
Well it's useful if you have a PS2, memory cards and controllers you can sell off. It's useful in terms of being able to subtract their physical space, their need for a/v inputs and the price you can sell them for off of your PS3's price. For example Gamespot will give you 100 bucks off your PS3... that makes the BC effectively cheapen the PS3 100 dollars.

On top of that you've got a new system that'll be supported for longer to play your old games...

The same can be said about the gamecube, that by buying a wii, you offset the price of the wii by the value of your gamecube, except that you won't get as much for it and you need to keep all the memory cards and controllers. On top of that... PS2 + PS1 > Gamecube...
Click to expand...

Like I said, it's a perk. It's not a core reason for picking up a next-gen system, anyone who thinks playing PS2 games on a PS3(or GC on a Wii/Xbox on 360) is a reason for getting one is just grasping at straws to justify picking one up, unless they didn't own the previous generation console as I stated. NES has had support dropped ages ago, but you can always find people who can refurbish them.
 
Bajaratt said:
Aside from driving, what good is it? Honestly, what else is it being used for besides driving and one game(flow).
Click to expand...

Flying a Warhawk, swinging a baseball bat, aiming a gun(UT3 aiming option), pushing/shoving people, shaking off fire/seeker bullets, ext.

On the other side, the Wii game I'm most interested in doesn't even use the Wiimote, what's up with that? If the Wiimote is the future of gaming, why do I need a wavebird to play Smash Bros? (And if you're curious... had Smash Bros used the wii-mote I'd laugh my ass off and not even consider it.)
 
Ruffyreborn said:
why should anybody need to insult anyone to get their point across?
Click to expand...
Because logic doesn't penetrate. Still, I called him an idiot for using flawed logic, not backing it up, and completely misunderstanding what a gimmick is. That's demonstrating a lack of intelligence, hence idiot; firestreak, while at I don't agree with about 90% of what he says, can at least make intelligent points and defend them; Guiller has yet to do even that.
 
People usually consider others with a different opinion than they have stupid, if nothing else as a reason to explain their opinion. "He thinks the Red Sox's new green uniform looks cool, therefore... he must be stupid." I usually try to get into the head of someone with different opinions of me... and usually find emotion at the heart of their argument rather than pure logic.

Tapping into collective emotions is an important part of selling an idea, be it a game console or a political philosophy. People can get pretty hostile when you try to challenge that.
 
Firestreak said:
Flying a Warhawk, swinging a baseball bat, aiming a gun(UT3 aiming option), pushing/shoving people, shaking off fire/seeker bullets, ext.

On the other side, the Wii game I'm most interested in doesn't even use the Wiimote, what's up with that? If the Wiimote is the future of gaming, why do I need a wavebird to play Smash Bros? (And if you're curious... had Smash Bros used the wii-mote I'd laugh my ass off and not even consider it.)
Click to expand...
So driving, cumbersome and un-immersive(what game even does this?), hard to pull off but possible, meh, another driving feature.

To be honest, I don't know why they bothered with making SBB not work with the wiimote. They could easily use the system for mortal combat/Marvel ultimate alliance, the already established battle system would work perfectly on the wiimote. Hit the A button to do normal attacks, hit A and swing up for the rising attack, A and down for the lower, etc. Hit B and do those motions for your special moves; it'd be easy to pull off.
 
Bajaratt said:
So driving, cumbersome and un-immersive(what game even does this?), hard to pull off but possible, meh, another driving feature.
Click to expand...

Motorstorm does this. The controls are very sensitive so it takes a while to get used to them... but they're VERY precise and good for turning, tiling and shifting weight while you're catching air. I would rather use a control stick... or really, a driving wheel, so where would that leave me playing a wii driving game?

As to Super Smash Bros... I could tell you why it won't work but I doubt you'll like what I have to say, and therefore disagree with me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top